jmv  e  ^ . 


3oi{ 


Oak  Street 
UNCLASSIFIED 


<vn,  -tij/3  p„  ... . 


PAMPHLET  Y 


An  Ex=President 

on  the 


Currency  Question 


The  Disasters 
which  would 
surely  follow 
the  Free 
and  Unlimited 
Coinage 
of  Silver 


Farmers 

and 

Laboringmen 
would  be 
the  first  to 
suffer 


Hon. 

Benjamin 

Harrison 

on  THE  ISSUES 
OF  THE 
CAMPAIGN 


New  York,  August  27,  1896. 


The  following  is  the  full  text  of  the  Address  of  Ex=President 
Benjamin  Harrison  on  the  Issues  of  the  Campaign,  Delivered 

in  New  York,  August  27,  1896 : 

LADIES  AND  GENTLEMEN:— 

I  am  on  the  Republican  retired  list,  noU  by  reason  of  any  age  limit  nor 
by  the  action  of  any  convention,  but  that  the  younger  men  might  have  a  chance 
and  that  I  might  have  a  rest.  [Laughter.]  But  I  am  not  a  soured  or  disappointed 
or  bed-ridden  citizen.  My  interest  in  my  country  did  not  cease  when  my  last 
salary  check  was  cashed.  [Laughter  and  applause.]  I  hoped  to  add  to  the  relief  from 
official  duties  retirement  from  the  arena  of  political  debate.  But  the  gentlemen  having 
in  charge  this  campaign  seemed  to  think  that  I  might  in  some  way  advance  the  inter¬ 
ests  of  those  principles  which  are  not  less  dear  to  me  than  they  are  to  you,  by  making 
here  in  this  great  city  a  public  address.  I  thought  they  greatly  magnified  the 
importance  of  anything  I  could  say,  but  I  could  not  quite  content  myself  to  subordi¬ 
nate  what  others  thought  to  be  a  public  duty  to  my  private  conscience.  I  am  here 
to-night,  not  to  make  any  keynote  speech,  but  only  to  express  my  personal  views  for 
which  no  one  else  will  be  in  any  measure  responsible,  for  this  speech  has  not  been 
submitted  to  the  judgment  of  anyone  until  now.  [Applause.]  I  shall  speak,  my 
fellow-citizens,  as  a  Republican — [cries  of  “  good  ”] — but  with  perfect  respect  to  those 
who  hold  different  opinions.  Indeed,  I  have  never  had  so  much  respect  for  Demo¬ 
crats  as  I  have  now.  [Applause.]  Or,  perhaps  I  should  say  I  never  had  so  much 
respect  for  so  many  Democrats  as  I  have  now.  [Applause.]  That  party  has  once 
more  exhibited  its  capacity  to  be  ruptured,  and  a  party  that  cannot  be  split  is  a  public 
menace.  When  the  leaders  of  a  party  assembled  in  convention  depart  from  its  tradi¬ 
tional  principles  and  advocate  doctrines  that  threaten  the  integrity  of  the  government 
the  social  order  of  our  communities  and  the  security  and  soundness  of  our  finance,  it 
ought  to  be  split,  and  it  dignifies  itself  when  it  does  split.  A  bolt  from  any  party  is 
now  and  then  a  most  reassuring  incident,  and  was  never  more  reassuring  and  never 
had  better  cause  than  now.  [Applause  and  cries  of  “you’re  right.”]  But  these  Dem¬ 
ocratic  friends  who  are  disposed  more  or  less  directly  to  help  the  cause  of  sound 
finance  in  this  campaign  ought  not  to  expect  that  the  Republican  party  will  reorganize 
itself  because  the  Democratic  party  has  disorganized  itself.  [Laughter  and  applause. 
“  That  was  a  beaut.”] 

THE  REPUBLICAN  PARTY  AND  SOUND  MONEY. 

The  Republican  party,  the  Republican  voter,  if  sound  money  triumphs,  as  I 
believe  it  will,  must  in  the  nature  of  the  thing  constitute  the  body  of  the  successful 
army.  We  ought  not,  therefore,  to  be  asked  to  do  anything  that  will  affect  the 
solidity,  the  loyalty,  the  discipline  or  the  enthusiasm  of  the  Republican  party. 


3 


[Applause.  A  voice,  “Nobody  going  out.”  This  reference  to  the  Bryan  meeting  in 
Madison  Square  Garden  was  greeted  with  prolonged  applause  and  laughter.]  The 
Republican  party  fronts  the  destructionists  and  trumpets  its  defiance  to  the  enemies 
of  sound  money.  It  will  fight,  however,  without  covering  any  of  the  glorious  mottoes 
and  inscriptions  that  are  upon  its  banner.  [Applause.]  When  the  house  is  on  fire — 
and  many  of  our  Democratic  friends  believe  that  to  be  the  present  domestic  situation 
— the  tenant  on  the  top  floor  ought  not  to  ask  the  tenant  in  the  basement  to  bury  any 
of  his  opinions  before  he  joins  the  fire  brigade,  and  our  Democratic  friends  who 
realize  as  we  realize  the  gravity,  the  far-reaching  consequences  of  this  campaign, 
ought  not  to  ask  the  Republican  party  to  reorganize  itself,  to  put  aside  any  of  the 
great  principles  that  it  has  advocated,  in  order  to  win  a  vote.  If  their  opinion  is 
sincerely  held,  as  they  insist,  it  ought  to  determine  their  action  for  themselves  with¬ 
out  reference  to  what  anybody  else  should  do.  And  I  submit  to  these  gentlemen,  for 
whose  opinions  1  have  the  highest  respect,  whether,  if  it  is  true,  as  they  say,  that  the 
success  of  the  Chicago  nominee  would  plunge  this  country  into  commercial  distress 
and  drag  the  nation’s  honor  in  the  dust,  there  can  be  only  one  question  for  such  a 
time  as  this:  How  can  we  most  surely  defeat  the  Chicago  nominee?  [Applause.] 
Neither  conventions  nor  committees  can  create  issues  nor  assign  them  to  their  places 
as  to  their  importance.  That  is  the  leading  issue  of  a  campaign  which  most  agitates 
and  most  interests  the  people. 


STAND  BY  THE  JUDICIARY  AND  EXECUTIVE. 

In  my  opinion  there  is  no  issue  presented  by  the  Chicago  convention  more  im¬ 
portant  and  vital  than  the  question  they  have  raised  of  protecting  the  power  and  duty 
of  the  national  courts  and  national  executive.  The  defense  of  the  constitution  and  of 
the  integrity  of  the  supreme  court  of  the  United  States  and  of  the  President’s  power 
and  duty  to  enforce  all  of  the  laws  of  the  United  States  without  awaiting  the  call  or 
% consent  of  the  governor  of  any  state,  is  an  important  and  living  issue  in  this  cam¬ 
paign.  [Applause.]  Tariff  and  coinage  will  be  of  little  moment  if  our  constitutional 
■  p 

government  is  overthrown.  When  we  have  a  President  who  believes  that  it  is  neither 
;  his  right  nor  his  duty  to  see  that  the  mail  trains  are  not  obstructed  and  that  interstate 
commerce  has  its  free  way  irrespective  of  state  lines,  and  courts  who  fear  to  use 
V  our  ancient  and  familiar  power  to  restrain  and  punish  lawbreakers,  free  trade  and 
^  free  silver  will  be  appropriate  accompaniments  of  such  an  administration  and  cannot 
>  add  appreciably  to  the  national  distress  or  the  national  dishonor.  [Applause.] 

There  is  only  one  rule  by  which  we  can  live  usefully  as  a  nation  or  peacefully 
^as  citizens.  It  is  the  rule  of  the  laws  constitutionally  enacted  and  finally  interpreted 
by  the  judicial  tribunal  appointed  by  the  constitulion.  When  it  becomes  the  rule  that 
'  -  violence  carries  its  end  we  have  anarchy — a  condition  as  destructive  to  honest  labor 
~^and  its  rewards  as  death  is  to  the  tissues  of  the  human  body.  [Applause.] 


4 


ARRAIGNS  THE  CHICAGO  CONVENTION. 

The  atmosphere  of  the  Chicago  convention  was  surcharged  with  the  spirit  of 
revolution.  Its  platform  was  carried  and  its  nominations  made  with  accompanying 
incidents  of  frenzy  that  startled  the  onlookers  and  amazed  the  country.  The  courts 
and  the  President  were  arraigned  for  enforcing  the  laws,  and  government  by  the  mob 
was  given  preference  over  government  by  the  law  enforced  by  the  court  decrees  and 
by  executive  orders.  The  spirit  that  exhibited  itself  in  this  convention  was  so  wild 
and  strangely  enthused  that  Mr.  Bryan  himself  likened  it  to  the  zeal  that  possessed 
the  crusaders  when  they  responded  to  the  impassioned  appeals  of  Peter  the  Hermit 
to  rescue  the  sepulcher  of  our  Lord  from  the  hands  of  the  infidels.  His  historical 
illustration  was  more  potent  and  more  forcible  than  he  knew,  for  the  zeal  of  the 
crusaders  was  a  blind  and  ignorant  zeal;  they  sought  to  rescue  the  transient  and 
ineffectual  sepulcher  that  had  held  the  body  of  the  Son  of  God  while  they  trampled 
upon  the  precepts  of  love  and  mercy  which  He  had  left  for  their  guidance  in  life. 
[Applause.]  He  told  us  that  the  silver  crusade  had  arrayed  father  against  son  and 
brother  against  brother,  and  had  severed  the  ties  of  love.  Senator  Hill,  watching  the 
strange  proceeding,  had  to  extend  that  brief  political  code  from  which  he  has  gained 
so  much  renown.  He  felt  compelled  to  say:  “I  am  a  Democrat,  but  I  am  not  a 
revolutionist.”  [Applause.]  Senator  Vest,  realizing  that  they  were  inaugurating  a 
revolution,  reminded  the  convention  that  revolutions  did  not  begin  with  the  rich 
and  prosperous.  Mr.  Tillman  felt  that  the  change  in  the  management  of  public 
affairs  was  to  be  so  radical  that  he  proposed  sulphur  fumigation  for  the  ship  before 
the  new  crew  took  possession  of  it.  [Laughter.]  Now,  my  friends,  all  these  things 
indicate  the  temper  in  which  that  platform  was  adopted  and  the  spirit  that  prompted 
the  nominations  that  were  made.  There  was  no  calm  deliberation.  There  was 
frenzy.  There  was  no  thoughtful  searching  for  the  man  who,  from  experience,  was 
most  able  to  direct  public  affairs.  There  was  an  impulsive  response  to  an  impas¬ 
sioned  speech  that  selected  the  nominee.  Not  amid  such  surroundings  as  that,  not 
under  such  influences,  are  those  calm,  discreet  things  done  that  will  commend  them¬ 
selves  to  the  judgment  of  the  American  people.  [Applause.]  They  denounce  in 
their  platform  interference  by  federal  authorities  in  local  affairs  as  a  violation  of  the 
constitution  of  the  United  States  and  a  Crime  against  free  institutions.  Mr.  Tillman 
in  his  speech  approved  this  declaration.  It  was  intended  to  be  in  words  a  direct  con¬ 
demnation  of  Mr.  Cleveland,  as  President  of  the  United  States,  for  using  the  power 
of  the  executive  to  brush  out  of  the  way  every  obstacle  to  the  free  passage  of  the 
mail  trains  and  interstate  commerce.  And,  my  friends,  whenever  our  people  approve 
the  choice  of  a  President  who  believes  he  must  ask  Governor  Altgeld  or  any  other 
governor  of  any  other  state  permission  to  enforce  the  laws  of  the  United  States,  we 
have  surrendered  the  victory  the  boys  won  in  1861.  [Great  applause.] 


5 


Once  a  grave  question  was  raised  whether  the  United  States  could  pass  its  troops 
through  Kentucky  to  meet  a  rebel  army  in  Tennessee.  My  friends,  this  constitutional 
question,  this  division  between  the  general  and  local  authorities  is  a  plain  and  easy 
one.  A  disturbance  which  is  purely  local  in  a  state  is  a  state  affair.  The  President 
cannot  send  troops  or  lend  any  aid  unless  the  legislature  calls  upon  him  for  help,  or 
the  governor  if  the  legislature  is  not  in  session.  But  when  a  law  of  the  United  States 
is  invaded  and  broken  it  is  the  sworn  duty  of  the  President  to  execute  it,  and  this 
convention  arraigned  the  President  for  doing  what  his  oath  compelled  him  to  do. 
[Applause.] 

Comrades  of  the  great  war  for  the  union,  sons  of  those  who  went  out  to  battle 
that  the  flag  might  not  lose  its  luster,  will  we  consent  after  these  years — [cries  of 
“No,  no”] — that  the  doctrine  that  was  shot  to  death  in  the  great  war  shall  be  revived 
and  made  victorious  in  a  civil  campaign?  [Cries  of  “No.”] 

But  this  assault  does  not  end  here.  The  supreme  court  of  the  United  States  and 
the  federal  lower  courts  are  arraigned  because  they  used  the  familiar  writ  of  injunc¬ 
tion  to  suppress  violence,  to  restrain  men  from  breaking  the  law,  and  that  the  plat¬ 
form  plainly  means. 

PLOT  TO  PACK  THE  SUPREME  COURT. 

I  will  show  you  that  it  was  understood  in  the  convention  and  in  the  committee 
on  resolutions  that  the  Democratic  policy  was  that  when  the  supreme  court,  exercising 
its  constitutional  power  and  duty,  gave  an  interpretation  to  a  law  of  the  United  States 
that  was  not  pleasing  to  congress  they  would  increase  the  number  of  judges  and  pack 
the  court  to  get  a  decision  to  please  them.  [Applause.] 

My  friends,  our  fathers  who  framed  this  government  divided  its  great  powers 
between  three  great  departments — the  legislative,  the  executive  and  the  judicial. 
They  sought  to  make  these  independent,  the  one  of  the  other,  so  that  neither  might 
overshadow  or  destroy  the  other.  The  supreme  court,  the  most  dignified  judicial 
body  in  the  world — [applause] — was  appointed  to  interpret  the  laws  and  the 
constitution,  and  when  that  court  pronounces  a  decree  as  to  the  powers  of  congress  or 
as  to  any  other  constitutional  question,  there  is  but  one  right  method  if  we  disagree 
and  that  is  the  method  pointed  out  by  the  constitution,  to  amend  it  to  conform  to  our 
views.  That  is  the  position  to-day.  Mr.  Hill  said  in  his  speech  of  this  assault  upon 
the  court:  “  That  provision,  if  it  means  anything,  means  that  it  is  the  duty  of 
congress  to  reconstruct  the  supreme  court  of  the  country.  It  means,”  and  now  note 
his  words,  “  and  it  was  openly  avowed  that  it  means  the  adding  of  additional  members 
to  it,  or  the  turning  out  of  office  and  reconstructing  the  whole  court.  I  will  not  follow 
any  such  revolutionary  step  as  that.” 

You  are  to  answer  then,  my  fellow  citizens,  in  all  the  gravity  of  a  great  crisis, 
whether  you  will  sustain  a  party  that  proposes  to  destroy  the  balance  which  our 


6 


fathers  instituted  in  our  form  of  government,  and  whenever  a  tumultuous  congress 
disagrees  with  the  supreme  court  and  a  subservient  President  is  in  the  White  House, 
that  the  judgment  of  the  court  shall  be  reconsidered  and  reversed  by  increasing  the 
number  of  judges  and  packing  the  court  with  men  who  will  decide  as  congress 
wants  them  to.  I  cannot  exaggerate  the  gravity,  and  the  importance,  and  the  danger 
of  this  assault  upon  our  constitutional  form  of  government. 

One  of  the  kindest  and  most  discriminating  critics  who  ever  wrote  with  a  foreign 
pen  about  American  affairs,  Mr.  Brice,  in  his  American  Commonwealth,  pointed  out 
this  danger,  that  the  constitution  did  not  fix  the  number  of  the  supreme  court  judges, 
and  that  it  was  possible  for  a  reckless  congress  and  a  reckless  executor  to  subordinate 
and  practically  destroy  the  supreme  court  by  the  process  I  have  just  described;  and 
the  Englishman,  after  speaking  of  this,  says:  “What  prevents  such  assaults  on  this 
fundamental  law?  Nothing  but  the  fear  of  the  people,  whose  broad,  good  sense  and 
attachment  to  the  principles  of  the  constitution  may  be  generally  relied  on  to 
condemn  such  a  perversion  of  its  powers.”  [Applause.]  Our  English  friend  did  not 
misjudge,  I  think,  the  sound,  good  sense  of  the  American  people  when  an  issue  like 
this  is  to  be  presented.  Whatever  the  question  is,  whether  Mr.  Bryan’s  view  of  the 
constitutional  question  shall  prevail,  or  that  of  the  august  tribunal  appointed  by  the 
constitution  to  settle  it,  the  courts  are  the  defense  of  the  weak.  The  rich  and 
powerful  have  other  resources,  but  the  poor  have  not.  The  high  minded,  independent 
judiciary  that  will  hold  to  the  line  in  questions  between  wealth  and  labor,  between 
the  rich  and  the  poor,  is  the  defense  and  security  of  the  defenseless.  [Applause.] 

TARIFF  DEBATE  HAS  BEEN  WON. 

I  do  not  intend  to  spend  any  time  in  the  discussion  of  the  tariff  question.  That 
debate  has  been  won — [applause] — and  need  not  be  protracted.  It  means  that  it 
might  run  on  eternally  upon  theoretical  lines.  We  had  had  some  experiences,  but 
they  were  historical,  remote  and  not  very  instructive  to  this  generation.  We  needed 
an  experience  of  our  own  and  we  have  had  it.  [Laughter.]  It  has  been  a  hard  lesson, 
but  a  very  convincing  one,  and  everybody  was  in  the  schoolhouse  when  it  was  given. 
[Laughter.] 

Mr.  Depew — [applause  and  laughter] — whose  absolute  accuracy  and  verity  when 
he  tells  a  story  you  can  all  bear  witness  to,  in  telling  that  story  of  our  talk  on  the 
White  House  steps,  did  an  unintentional  injury  to  my  modesty.  [Laughter.]  I  did 
not  for  a  moment  suppose  that  any  of  those  influences  that  have  elevated  American 
prosperity  until  the  mark  on  the  stones  was  higher  than  any  other  record  that  had 
been  made  was  at  all  significant  or  of  consequence.  As  I  have  more  than  once  said, 
it  was  a  controversy  hot  of  men — it  was  not  a  question  of  what  men  controlled  the 
government — it  was  wholly  a  controversy  between  Democratic  followers  and  Repub 
lican  followers,  and  in  this  tariff  debate,  if  it  is  to  go  on,  we  have  history  so  fresh  and 


7 


recent,  history  so  indelibly  written  on  the  hearts  and  minds  of  our  people  that  certain 
things  must  be  admitted,  and  among  these  things  the  historical  fact  that  in  1892  we 
had  the  most  prosperous  times,  the  most  general  diffusion  of  prosperity,  the  most  uni¬ 
versal  participation  in  prosperity  and  the  highest  mark  of  prosperity  we  have  ever 
attained  as  a  nation.  [Applause.]  Now,  what  has  happened  since?  Then  our  busi¬ 
ness  prosperity  was  like  the  strong  current  of  the  mighty  river;  nowit  is  like  a  fading 
spring  in  an  August  drought.  A  panic  in  1898  of  most  extraordinary  character  has 
been  succeeded  by  a  gradual  drying  up,  less  and  less  and  less,  until  universal  busi¬ 
ness  distraction  and  anxiety  prevail  all  over  our  community. 

I  do  not  believe  there  has  ever  been  a  time,  except  perhaps  in  the  very  heat  of 
some  active  panic,  when  universal  business  fear  and  anxiety  and  watchfulness  even 
to  the  point  of  desperation  has  characterized  this  great  metropolis  as  it  does  today. 
[Applause.]  Men  have  been  afraid  to  go  away  for  a  vacation.  They  have  felt  that 
they  must  every  day  in  this  burning  sun  come  into  the  city  and  watch  their  business. 
That  is  the  situation.  What  has  brought  it  about?  Gentlemen,  who  is  there  to  de¬ 
fend  the  Wilson  tariff  bill?  Who  says  it  is  a  good  tariff  measure?  [Applause,  and  a 
voice,  “  Nobody.”]  I  do  not  believe  a  Democrat  can  be  found  to  say  that  it  is.  Mr. 
Cleveland  repudiated  it.  It  was  so  bad  that  he  would  not  attach  his  official  signature 
to  it,  and  it  became  a  law  without  it.  He  said  it  was  full  of  incongruities  and  ine¬ 
qualities.  And  it  was  abetter  one  than  he  wanted  to  give  us.  [Laughter  and  applause.] 

What  has  been  the  result  of  that  measure?  When  a  few  years  ago,  during  the 
Morton  campaign  in  New  lrork—  [applause] — I  discussed  this  question,  I  said  that 
the  old  Democratic  doctrine  used  to  be  that  the  burden  of  our  public  expense  should 
be  laid  upon  importations,  that  the  tariff  should  provide  for  the  cost  of  running  our 
government,  and  I  pointed  out  then  how  our  Democratic  friends  had  left  that  platform 
and  were  now  endeavoring  to  obtain  revenue  by  internal  taxation  rather  than  to  allow 
the  support  of  the  government  of  the  United  States  to  be  maintained  upon  the  im¬ 
portation  of  foreign  goods.  What  has  been  the  result? 

One  of  the  experiments  in  internal  taxation,  the  income  tax,  was  held  to  be  un¬ 
constitutional  by  the  supreme  court.  So  eager  were  our  Democratic  friends  to  relieve 
their  embarrassment  and  to  put  directly  upon  our  people,  according  to  the  English 
system,  a  tax  to  support  our  government,  that  they  passed  an  unconstitutional  act  in 
order  to  levy  internal  taxes  and  help  out  a  tariff  bill  which  had  reduced  the  duties 
upon  importations.  Now  what  has  been  the  effect  of  that? 

THE  WILSON  TARIFF  AND  THE  BOND  ISSUES. 

It  has  failed  to  produce  revenues  enough,  supplemented  by  our  internal  tax,  to 
maintain  the  government.  There  has  been  an  annual  deficit  approaching  $50,000,000 
every  year  and  the  national  treasury  has  been  continually  in  a  state  of  embarrass¬ 
ment.  Our  manufacturers,  left  without  adequate  protection,  have  been  successively 


8 


and  gradually  closing  up  and  putting  out  their  fires.  But  not  only  has  this  produced 
such  an  effect,  but  it  has  practically  contributed  to  the  financial  depression  that  we 
are  in. 

The  maintenance  of  the  gold  reserve  up  to  $100,000,000  by  the  government  for 
the  redemption  of  our  notes  was  essential  to  confidence  in  the  stability  of  our  finances. 
When  the  government  reserve  runs  down  people  begin  at  once  to  say  :  “We  may 
come  to  the  silver  basis;  gold  is  going  out;  the  reserve  is  going  down,”  and  this  fear 
is  greatly  increased.  But  how  can  you  keep  a  gold  reserve  of  $100,000,000  when  you 
have  not  got  $100,000,000  in  the  treasury  all  told  ?  How  can  you  maintain  this  gold 
reserve  for  the  redemption  of  notes  when  you  have  an  annual  and  continual  deficit  in 
your  income  not  equaling  your  expenses  ?  So  that,  my  friends,  this  tariff  bill  has 
not  only  contributed  by  increasing  importation,  by  taking  away  the  needful  support 
for  our  own  manufactures,  but  it  has  contributed  in  the  way  of  increasing  the  silver 
scare  to  bring  us  into  the  present  condition  of  distrust  and  dismay  which  now  pre¬ 
vails.  [Applause.] 

The  bond  sales  have  been  made  necessary  by  reason  of  this  deficit — because,  I 
think,  everyone  will  agree  that  as  a  financial  problem  it  is  one  thing  when  you  have 
$300,000,000  surplus  in  the  treasury  to  keep  $1  in  $3  in  gold,  and  quite  another  when 
you  have  only  $125,000,000  in  the  treasury,  all  told.  [Applause.] 

But  I  did  not  intend  to  follow  this  question  further.  I  am  quite  as  much,  how¬ 
ever,  opposed  to  cheapening  the  American  working  men  and  working  women  as  I 
am  to  cheapening  our  dollars.  [Applause.]  I  am  quite  as  strongly  in  favor  of  keep¬ 
ing  a  day’s  work  at  home  as  I  am  gold  dollars.  [Applause.]  If  it  could  be  shown 
to-night  that  the  gallant  soldier,  that  typical  young  American,  that  distinguished  and 
useful  statesman,  William  McKinley  of  Ohio — [applause  and  cheers] — would  cer¬ 
tainly  be  elected  President,  how  the  bears  would  take  to  cover  on  the  stock  exchange 
to-morrow.  My  friends,  as  a  Republican  I  am  proud  of  many  things,  but  I  can  sum 
up  as  the  highest  satisfaction  I  have  had  in  the  party  and  its  career  that  the  prospect 
of  Republican  success  never  did  disturb  business.  [Applause.] 

NEED  OF  CAUTION  IN  THE  CHOICE  OF  AN  EXECUTIVE. 

In  connection  with  this  financial  matter,  do  we  all  realize  how  important  the 
choice  of  a  President  is?  Do  you  know  that  as  the  law  is  now,  without  the  passage 
of  any  free  coinage  of  silver  law  at  all,  it  is  in  the  power  of  the  President  of  the 
United  States  to  bring  the  business  of  this  country  to  a  silver  basis?  All  he  has  to 
do  is  to  let  the  gold  reserve  go,  to  pay  out  silver  when  men  ask  for  gold,  and  we  are 
there  already.  It  is  only  because  the  Presidents  of  the  United  States  we  have  had 
and  the  one  we  have  now  have  regarded  it  under  the  law  as  their  public  duty  to 
maintain  the  gold  basis,  maintaining  that  parity  between  our  silver  and  gold  coins 
which  the  law  declares  is  the  policy  of  the  government,  and  because  he  has  had  the 


9 


courage  to  execute  the  powers  given  to  him  by  the  resumption  act  to  carry  out  that 
declaration  of  the  public  law.  I  undertake,  therefore,  to  say  that  if  Mr.  Bryan  or  a 
man  holding  his  views  were  in  the  presidential  chair,  without  any  legislation  by 
congress,  we  should  be  on  a  silver  basis  in  a  week’s  time.  [Applause.] 

Three  or  four  years  ago,  when  I  was  in  New  York,  some  one  of  these  reporters 
who  sometimes  hear  things  that  are  not  intended  for  them,  got  hold  of  a  remark  of 
mine  about  the  wild  horses  that  Mr.  Cleveland  had  to  handle,  and  I  simply  meant  by 
that  what  has  since  been  demonstrated,  that  he  did  not  have  a  compact  or  solidified 
party  behind  him,  that  the  Democratic  party  in  congress  represented  every  shade  of 
every  ism  that  had  ever  been  propounded  in  the  country,  and  that  he  could  not 
manage  it.  My  prophecy  has  become  a  verity.  They  have  left  him.  They  aban¬ 
doned  him,  and  now,  as  that  caution  was  meant  to  indicate  that  we  needed  to  look 
out  after  our  congress  as  well  as  our  President,  this  caution  is  intended  to  show  you 
at  this  time  that  we  need  to  look  after  our  President  if  we  would  avoid  the  calamity 
of  having  this  country  put  upon  the  Mexican  basis  of  money. 


THE  SILVER  QUESTION  DISCUSSED. 

The  silver  question— what  is  it  ?  Do  we  want  silver  because  we  want  more 
money,  a  larger  circulation  ?  I  have  not  heard  anybody  say  so.  Mr.  Bryan  is  not 
urging  it  on  that  basis.  If  anyone  were  to  seek  to  give  that  as  a  reason  for  wanting 
free  silver,  he  would  be  very  soon  confounded  by  the  statement  that  free  silver 
would  put  more  gold  out  of  circulation  than  the  mints  of  the  United  States  could 
possibly  put  in  of  silver  in  years,  and  that  instead  of  having  more  money  we  would 
have  less.  [Applause.]  With  our  six  hundred  and  odd  millions  of  gold  driven  out  of 
circulation  we  will  reduce  the  per  capita  money  of  this  country  between  $8  and  $9. 
So  it  is  not  for  more  money.  We  have  an  abundant  supply  of  circulating  medium — 
gold,  silver,  national  bank  paper,  greenbacks,  treasury  notes,  fractional  silver.  We 
have  something  like  $23  per  capita  of  our  population.  What  is  it  then  that  creates 
this  demand  for  silver  ?  It  is  openly  avowed  :  It  is  not  more  dollars,  but  cheaper 
dollars  that  are  wanted.  It  is  the  lower  standard  of  value  that  they  are  demanding. 
They  say  gold  has  gone  up  until  it  has  ceased  to  be  a  proper  standard  of  value  and 
they  want  silver.  But  how  do  they  want  it  ?  Now,  my  friends,  there  is  a  great  deal 
of  talk  of  bimetallism,  of  the  double  standard  and  a  great  deal  of  confusion  in  the  use 
of  those  terms.  Bimetallism  is  the  use  of  the  two  metals  as  money  where  they  are 
both  used.  By  a  double  standard,  they  mean  that  we  have  a  gold  dollar  and  a  silver 
dollar  which  shall  be  units  of  value  by  which  all  property  and  all  wages  and  every¬ 
thing  is  to  be  measured. 

Our  fathers  thought  that  when  they  used  these  two  metals  in  coinage  they  must 
determine  the  intrinsic  relative  value  of  the  two,  so  that  a  comparison  of  the  markets 


10 


of  the  world  would  show  just  what  relation  one  ounce  of  silver  bore  to  one  ounce  of 
gold;  how  many  ounces  of  silver  it  took  to  be  equal  to  one  ounce  of  gold  in  the  mar¬ 
kets  of  the  world  where  gold  and  silver  were  used,  and  they  carefully  went  about 
ascertaining  that.  Jefferson  and  Alexander  Hamilton  gave  their  great  powers  to  the 
determination  of  that  question,  and  they  collected  the  market  reports  and  they  s'udied 
with  all  their  power  that  question,  and  when  they  had  found  what  appeared  to  be  the 
general  and  average  relative  value  of  these  two  metals  they  fixed  upon  a  ratio 
between  them.  Now  what  was  the  object  of  all  that  ?  Why  did  they  lump  all  ? 
Because  they  fully  understood,  unless  these  dollars  were  of  the  same  inherent, 
intrinsic  value,  that  both  of  them  could  not  be  standards  of  value  and  both  could  not 
circulate.  Why,  everybody  knows  that  it  is  essential  that  the  length  of  his  stilts 
below  the  tread  shall  be  the  same.  [Laughter.]  What  is  the  law  that  governs  here  ? 
It  is  j  ust  the  simple  law  of  human  selfishness  and  self-protection  that  if  you  have  two 
things,  either  one  of  which  will  pay  a  debt,  and  one  is  not  as  valuable  as  the  other, 
you  are  sure  to  give  the  least  valuable  one.  [Laughter.]  It  is  just  upon  the  principle 
that  a  man  who  can  pay  a  debt  with  one  dollar  won’t  give  two— precisely  that.  So 
that  unless  these  two  things  maintain  approximately  the  relative  value  you  cannot 
make  such  dollars  circulate  together.  The  one  that  is  more  valuable  the  man  will 
keep  in  his  pocket,  or  he  will  sell  it  to  a  bullion  broker,  and  everybody  will  use 
the  other. 

CHEAP  DOLLAR  ALWAYS  VICTORIOUS. 

It  is  an  old  law  proclaimed  years  ago  in  England  by  Gresham  that  the  cheaper 
dollar  drives  the  better  one  out.  [Applause.]  It  has  been  illustrated  in  our  history 
repeatedly.  It  has  been  illustrated  in  the  history  of  every  commercial  nation  in  the 
world  and  anybody  of  half  sense  could  see  why  it  is  so.  [Laughter.]  You  might 
just  as  well  say  that  if  we  had  two  kinds  of  bushels — if  the  law  should  declare  that 
sixty  pounds  of  wheat  was  a  bushel  and  thirty  pounds  of  wheat  was  a  bushel — well 
what  farmer  would  deliver  wheat  by  the  sixty-pound  measure  if  he  had  sold  it  by 
the  bushel?  [Applause.]  Now,  so  nice  were  our  people  in  trying  to  adjust  this  that 
they  went  into  decimal  fractions.  We  say  16  to  1.  In  fact  that  is  not  the  ratio.  It  is 
15.988  plus.  Now  that  is  the  actual  ratio.  It  is  so  near  16  that  we  call  it  16,  but  the 
men  who  made  our  silver  dollar  and  our  gold  dollar  were  so  nice  in  their  calculations 
that  they  went  into  decimal  fractions  into  thousandths  to  adjust  it  accurately. 

Now,  what  do  these  people  propose  to  do  !  To  take  any  account  of  thousandths? 
No.  When  the  markets  of  the  world  fix  the  relative  value  of  silver  or  gold  at  thirty- 
one  ounces  of  silver  to  one  ounce  of  gold  they  propose  to  say  sixteen.  [Laughter.] 
Well,  my  friends,  there  has  been  nothing  more  amusing,  and  yet  I  fear  that  with  the 
thoughtless,  it  may  have  been  in  some  measure  misleading  ;  then  the  repeated  dec¬ 
laration  of  Mr.  Bryan  that  everybody  admitted  that  bimetallism  was  a  good  thing — 


'  .  11 


there  is  no  debate  on  that  subject,  and  that  the  debate  of  the  campaign  has  come 
down  to  this  fine  point — the  Republicans  say  we  cannot  have  this  good  thing  without 
the  consent  of  England,  and  we  say  we  can  have  it  ourselves,  and  he  has  endeavored 
to  pivot  this  great  campaign,  with  its  tremendous  issues,  upon  that  pinhole.  [Applause.] 


WHY  THE  SILVER  DOLLAR  REMAINS  GOOD. 

We  hear  a  great  deal  about  the  great  resources  and  wealth  and  power  of  this 
country,  and  I  do  not  allow  anybody  to  go  beyond  my  appreciation  of  them  ;  but 
what  is  the  use  of  talking  about  ail  that  when  you  do  not  propose  to  put  this  wealth 
and  power  and  influence  behind  the  silver  dollar  at  all?  [Applause.]  As  things  are 
now  the  silver  dollars  that  we  have  are  supported  by  the  government,  and  the  govern¬ 
ment  that  supports  this  silver  bullion  has  issued  these  dollars  on  its  own  account — 
not  for  the  mine  owner — and  it  has  pledged  its  sacred  honor  it  would  make  every  one 
of  these  silver  dollars  as  good  as  a  gold  dollar.  [Great  applause.]  And  that  is  a  power¬ 
ful  support.  Without  it  disparity  between  these  metals  would  at  once  show  itself  in 
the  markets,  and  there  would  be  some  sense  in  the  talk  which  our  populistic  friends 
indulge  in  when  they  speak  of  the  power  of  this  government  if  they  propose  to  put 
this  power  behind  their  free  coinage.  Rut  they  do  not.  They  propose  that  the  men 
who  dig  silver  out  of  the  mines  may  bring  it  to  the  mint  and  have  it  stamped  and 
handed  back  to  him  as  a  dollar,  the  government  having  no  responsibility  about  it.  These 
men  would  reject  with  contempt  the  proposition  that  free  coinage  was  to  come  with  a 
pledge  on  behalf  of  the  government  to  maintain  the  parity  of  the  two  dollars. 
[Applause.]  But  this  feeling  is  well  adapted  to  touch  the  prevailing  American  bump¬ 
tiousness,  and  well  adapted  to  touch  that  prejudice  against  England  which  the  people 
have.  But  can  we  do  these  things  ourselves?  Is  it  a  question  whether  we  will  do  it 
or  ask  somebody’s  consent  whether  we  may,  or  ask  the  co-operation  of  somebody? 
Not  at  all. 

SOME  THINGS  THAT  THE  GOVERNMENT  CANNOT  DO. 

I  will  tell  you  what  this  government  can  do  alone.  It  can  fix  its  money  unit. 
It  can  declare  by  law  what  shall  be  the  relative  value  of  an  ounce  of  gold  and  an 
ounce  of  silver,  but  it  cannot  make  that  last  declaration  good.  [Applause.]  It  is  un¬ 
questionably  fully  within  the  power  of  this  government  to  bring  this  country  to  a 
silver  basis  by  coining  silver  dollars  and  making  them  legal  tender.  They  can  do 
that.  This  government  says  you  shall  take  one  of  those  dollars  in  discharge  of  any 
debt  owing  to  you  for  a  dollar,  notwithstanding  you  may  have  loaned  gold  dollars;  but 
it  cannot  say,  and  enforce  its  decree,  if  you  should  call  out  the  regular  army  and  navy 
and  muster  all  our  great  modern  ships  and  add  the  militia  and  put  William  J.  Bryan 
in  command  of  them — it  cannot  enforce  the  decree  that  one  ounce  of  gold  is  the 


12 


equivalent  of  sixteen  ounces  of  silver.  [Great  applause  and  cheers.]  Not  only 
that,  not  France  and  England  and  Germany  can  do  that  unless  the  markets  respond. 
[Applause.]  Why?  You  may  make  me  take  a  silver  dollar  for  a  debt,  but  if  I  have 
bought  my  goods  at  gold  prices  you  cannot  make  me  give  as  many  yards  of  cloth  for: 
a  silver  dollar  as  I  have  been  in  the  habit  of  giving  for  a  gold  one.  [Applause  and 
cheers.]  If  I  have  a  gold  dollar  in  this  hand  and  a  silver  one  in  that  and  you  de¬ 
clare  they  are  equal  and  I  can  take  the^  gold  dollar  to  a  bullion  broker  and  get  two 
dollars  for  it,  I  know  it  is  a  lie.  [Great  applause  and  cheers.]  If  I  have  nothing  but 
a  gold  dollar  and  sugar  is  twenty  pounds  for  a  dollar,  I  will  not  give  that  gold  dollar 
for  twenty  pounds  of  sugar.  I  will  take  it  around  to  a  broker  and  get  two  silver  dol¬ 
lars  for  it  and  get  the  twenty  pounds  of  sugar  and  have  one  silver  dollar  left.  [Laugh¬ 
ter.]  So  it  is,  my  friends.  We  can  of  ourselves,  of  our  own  wisdom,  declare  the  unit 
of  value.  We  can  coin  silver  freely,  but  we  cannot  make  sixteen  ounces  of  silver 
equal  to  one  ounce  of  gold  unless  it  is.  [Applause.]  And  it  is  not  unless  the  mer¬ 
chants  take  it  at  that  rate.  That  is  where  all  this  thing  comes  in.  It  is  trade;  it  is 
the  merchant;  it  is  the  man  who  exchanges  and  deals  in  these  things  that  fixes  their 
relative  value,  and  if  you  do  not  take  the  value  he  fixes  the  gold  dollar  will  go  back 
to  the  gold  vault  and  the  gold  will  go  out  of  circulation. 


LAWS  OF  TRADE  FIRMLY  FIXED. 

What  is  another  consequence?  In  this  connection  these  gentleman  say:  “  Why, 
did  we  not  win  the  battle  at  Bunker  Hill?'”  [Laughter.]  “  Did  not  wTe  whip  the 
British  at  Yorktown,  and  do  you  mean  to  say  we  can’t  do  it  again?”  The  logic  of 
these  gentlemen — if  I  may  use  such  a  term  in  connection  with  such  balderdash— is 
that  a  nation  that  can  do  these  great  things  and  establish  its  political  independence 
can  also  be  financially  and  commercially  free.  It  cannot  be  free  of  the  laws  of  trade. 
[Applause.]  They  can  say  that  ten  muskrat  skins  are  equal  to  one  beaver  skin,  but 
that  don’t  make  them  so  ;  the  fur  trader  fixes  that  question.  [Applause  and  laugh¬ 
ter.] 

What  is  the  next  suggestion  ?  It  is,  my  friends,  in  the  case  of  free  silver,  what 
is  the  financial  and  moral  equivalent  of  a  declaration  that  50-cent  pieces  are  dollars? 
They  might  just  as  well  pass  a  law  that  50  cents  is  a  dollar.  That  would  not  make  it 
so,  would  it?  But  it  would  be  a  legal  dollar.  But  it  would  not  buy  a  dollar’s  worth 
of  anything.  What  is  the  effect  of  that  ?  The  merchant  would  take  care  of  himself. 
A  man  keeps  a  store  down  here  on  Broadway  and  the  law  is  going  into  operation 
to-night.  He  summons  all  his  clerks  and  buys  25  cents’  worth  of  pencils,  and  before 
he  opens  his  store  in  the  morning  he  has  marked  up  his  goods  to  the  new  scale.  He 
can  do  all  that,  but  there  are  great  numbers  of  people  who  enlist  our  interest  and 
some  of  whom  enkindle  our  sympathies  who  cannot  use  the  pencil. 


13 


Take  the  workingman.  He  cannot  go  to  the  pay  roll  with  a  pencil  and  mark  it 
up.  He  has  got  to  consult  somebody.  He  has  to  enter  into  an  agreement.  He  has 
got  to  get  some  other  man’s  consent  before  he  can  mark  up  his  wages.  Then  there  is 
the  pensioner,  those  that  are  receiving  pensions  from  this  government  for  gallant 
deeds  done  in  the  war,  and  others  for  the  loss  of  beloved  ones.  He  cannot  take  his 
pension  certificate  and  when  it  reads  $8  make  it  read  $16.  He  must  wait  for  an  appeal 
to  congress,  and  a  congress  that  is  populistic  in  character  would  be  unsympathetic. 
[Applause.]  He  must  make  an  appeal  to  congress  to  have  his  pension  raised  to  twice 
what  it  was  before  he  is  made  equal.  What  can  the  depositors  in  our  savings  banks, 
this  great  company  of  widows  and  orphans,  the  people  of  small  means  who  are  put¬ 
ting  by  a  few  pennies  against  a  hard  time  in  life,  what  can  they  do  when  the  change 
comes  ?  Can  they  take  their  bank  pass-book  and  where  it  3ays  $10  write  $20  ?  Not 
at  all. 

Take  the  men  who  have  life  insurance — a  man  has  providently  taken  out  a  policy 
that  his  widow  and  children  might  not  come  to  want  when  the  broadwinning  hand 
was  stricken  in  death — can  they,  where  the  policy  reads  $5,000,  make  it  $10,000?  Can 
the  managers  of  these  institutions  make  it  right  with  them  ?  No.  This  policy  coerces 
integrity.  [Applause.]  However  honest  a  president  of  a  savings  bank  may  be, 
however  full  of  sympathy  the  president  of  a  life  association  may  be,  he  is  compelled 
to  say:  “  All  of  the  loans  of  this  company  are  scaled  down  to  50  cent  dollars.  We 
loaned  dollars  that  were  worth  100  cenis;  we  are  now  being  paid  in  the  reduced  dol¬ 
lar  ;  although  our  integrity  revolts  against  it,  our  honesty  is  coerced  and  we  must  pay 
the  widow  half.”  [Applause.] 


WOULD  CHEAT  THE  WORKINGMAN. 

My  friends,  these  men  surely  do  not  contemplate  the  irretrievable  and  extensive 
character  of  the  disaster  and  disturbance  and  disruption  which  they  are  proposing 
for  all  of  us  in  all  our  business  affairs,  great  and  simple.  Take  the  laboring  man,  how 
full  of  sympathy  they  are  for  him!  My  countrymen,  I  never  spoke  a  false  word  to 
the  laboring  man  in  my  life.  [Great  applause.]  I  have  never  sought  to  reach  his 
vote  or  influence  by  appeals  to  that  part  of  his  nature  that  will  pollute  the  intellect 
and  the  conscience.  I  have  believed  and  I  believe  to-day  that  any  system  that  main¬ 
tains  the  prices  of  labor  in  this  country,  that  brings  hope  into  the  life  of  the  laboring 
man,  that  enables  him  to  put  by  some  money,  that  gives  him  a  stake  in  good  order  in 
the  property  of  the  country,  is  the  policy  that  should  be  our  American  policy.  [Ap¬ 
plause.]  I  have  resisted  in  many  campaigns  this  idea  that  a  debased  currency  could 
help  the  workingman.  The  first  dirty  errand  that  a  dirty  dollar  does  is  to  cheat  the 
workingman.  [Applause.] 


14 


My  friends,  a  cold  statistical  inquiry,  non  partisan  in  its  character,  was  made  by 
a  committee  of  the  senate  in  1890  and  some  following  year.  The  committee  was 
composed  of  Democrats  and  Republicans,  and  they  set  out  to  study  as  statisticians  the 
relative  prices  of  commodities  and  wages  at  different  periods  in  the  history  of  our 
country.  This  investigation  covered  the  years  of  the  war.  It  showed  how  prices  of 
goods  went  up  and  in  what  proportion  labor  advanced.  Goods  went  up  rapidly, 
because  the  pencil  process  is  a  quick  process.  Wages  went  up  haltingly  and  slowly, 
because  the  employer  has  to  be  persuaded  and  the  pencil  won’t  serve.  Now,  I  have 
here  somewhere  a  memorandum  of  some  of  those  facts  resulting  from  that  investiga¬ 
tion.  Labor  in  one  period  advanced  3  per  cent.  Goods,  the  things  the  men  had  to 
buy  out  of  their  wages  for  their  families  and  living,  advanced  16  per  cent.  Through 
another  period  the  laborers’  wages  advanced  10%  per  cent,  and  the  price  of  goods 
advanced  49  per  cent.  In  another  period  the  wages  of  the  laborer  w^ent  up  25  per 
cent,  and  the  prices  of  merchandise  advanced  90  per  cent.  In  another  period  the 
laborers’  wages  went  up  48  per  cent,  and  the  prices  of  goods  117  per  cent.  Now, 
these  statistics  are  the  result  of  a  cold,  scientific  inquiry,  made  by  men  of  both  parties 
to  determine  what  the  truth  was,  and  the  truth  they  found  that  the  enormous  dis¬ 
parity  between  the  advance  of  the  cost  of  living  and  the  advance  of  wages  falls  in 
exactly  with  what  we  would  conclude  in  advance. 

The  laborers,  men  who  work,  whether  with  head  or  hand,  in  salaried  positions, 
would  do  well  to  take  these  facts  to  heart  and  settle  the  question  after  that  broad, 
deep  inquiry  to  which  Mr.  Bryan  invites  you  as  to  whether  you  want  to  enter  into 
another  experience  such  as  we  had  during  the  war,  when  wages  advanced  so  slowly 
and  tediously,  and  the  cost  of  your  living  moved  on  so  swiftly.  [Mr.  Harrison  looked 
at  his  watch.  Cries  of  “Go  on;  we  are  all  here.”]  All  of  my  strength  and  my  voice 
is  not  here. 


EVILS  OF  THE  DEBASED  DOLLAR. 

I  have  sketched  very  hastily  some  of  the  evils  that  will  result  from  this  change 
to  a  debased  dollar,  a  contraction  of  our  currency  by  the  exporting  of  our  gold  and  a 
readjustment  of  everything.  I  read  the  other  day  in  a  paper  a  most  amusing  descrip¬ 
tion  of  the  troubles  of  the  ticket  agent  at  Laredo,  a  station  on  the  Mexican  railway, 
wTho  had  to  sell  tickets  to  people  who  came  from  the  United  States  with  United 
States  money  going  into  Mexico  and  then  to  people  who  came  out  of  Mexico  and 
who  gave  him  Mexican  money.  He  had  a  large  book  bound  up  with  yellow  paper 
and  he  had  to  cover  one  whole  sheet  in  his  calculation  usually  when  he  sold  a  ticket. 
[Laughter.] 

That  is  what  would  happen  everywhere.  Everything  would  have  to  be 
readjusted,  the  prices  of  everything,  the  whole  intricate  business  adjustments  of  the 


15 


country  would  have  to  be  readjusted,  and  while  that  process  was  going  on  uncertainty 
would  characterize  business,  resulting  in  panic  and  disaster. 

Now,  who  will  get  any  benefit?  Well,  the  man  who  owes  a  debt  that  he 
contracted  upon  a  gold  basis  and  is  able  to  pay  it  with  a  50-cent  dollar.  He  and  the 
mine  owner,  who  gets  an  exaggerated  price  for  the  products  of  his  mine,  are  the 
only  two  people  or  classes  of  people  that  I  can  see  would  have  any  benefit  out  of  it. 
My  friends,  the  people  who  advocate  this  class  legislation,  this  legislation  favorable 
to  the  mine  owners,  to  double  the  price  of  the  products  of  their  mines,  and  offer  this 
temptation  of  repudiation  to  the  better  class,  is  the  party  that  has  for  twenty  years 
been  proclaiming  against  class  legislation.  [Applause.J 


EFFECT  ON  THE  FARMER. 

They  make  a  strong  appeal  to  the  farmer.  They  say  it  will  put  up  prices.  Well 
in  a  sense,  yes.  Nominally,  yes;  really,  no.  If  wheat  goes  from  50  cents  to  $1.20 
the  price  has  been  increased,  you  will  say;  but  if  the  price  of  everything  else  has 
gone  up  in  the  same  proportion,  a  bushel  of  wheat  won’t  buy  for  the  farmer  any 
more  sugar,  or  coffee,  or  farming  implements,  or  anything  else  that  he  has  to 
purchase.  If  that  dollar  won’t  buy  for  the  farmer  any  more,  or  be  a  better  dollar  than 
the  one  we  have  now,  where  is  the  good  to  anybody  of  introducing  these  fictitious 
prices  that  are  now  real?  They  would  work  very  well  for  the  farmer  if  the  prices  of 
wTheat,  hay,  oats  and  rye  would  double  and  nothing  else  would  double,  but  if 
everything  else  doubles,  who  is  richer  than  he  was  before?  Only  the  man  who 
bought  vdien  he  had  an  honest  dollar  and  paid  in  a  debased  one;  only  the  mine 
owner,  who  uses  this  government  to  add  50  cents  to  the  value  of  every  dollar’s  worth 
of  metal  that  he  produces  from  his  mine.  [Applause.] 

That  is  not  even  a  Democratic  doctrine.  It  involves  the  idea  that  this  government 
of  ours  shall  pay  not  only  its  debt  of  honor,  but  that  they  pay  the  interest  on  its  bonds 
and  the  circulating  notes  in  a  debased  currency.  My  countrymen,  this  country  of 
ours  during  the  troublous  time  of  the  war  may  have  had  severe  trials,  but  these 
financial  questions  are  scarcely  less  troublous  than  those.  During  those  troublous 
times  we  had  accumulated  a  debt  so  large  that  many  of  our  pessimistic  Democratic 
friends  told  us  we  could  never  pay  it.  We  had  had  a  currency  which  we  were 
compelled  to  make  a  legal  tender  and  use  that  the  constitution  might  live,  but  no 
sooner  had  the  war  ended  than  the  great  conscience  of  this  people  declared  the 
nation  that  has  crushed  this  great  rebellion,  that  has  lifted  itself  in  its  pride  and  its 
constitutional  glory  to  a  fearless  position  among  the  nations  of  the  earth,  should  not 
continue  to  have  a  depreciated  and  debased  currency,  and  we  walked  up  to  resumption 
and  we  made  the  greenback  dollar  a  par  dollar  in  gold. 


16 


Shall  we  now  in  these  times,  when  all  the  ills  we  suffer  are  curable  if  we  only 
pass  a  revenue  bill  that  will  generously  replenish  the  treasury  of  the  United  States, 
that  will  generously  protect  American  labor  against  injurious  competition  and  bring 
back  again  full  prosperity  to  all  our  people — shall  we  now  contemplate  for  a  moment 
or  allow  to  have  any  power  over  our  hearts  and  minds  this  temptation  to  debase  our 
currency  and  put  it  in  a  financial  position  alongside  of  the  Asiatic  countries,  of  our 
weak  and  struggling  sister  republic  of  Mexico  ?  Does  not  every  instinct  of  pride, 
does  not  every  instinct  of  self-interest,  does  not  every  thoughtful,  affectionate  inter¬ 
est  in  others,  does  not  our  sense  of  justice  and  honor,  rise  up  to  rebuke  the  infamous 
proposition  that  this  government  and  its  people  shall  become  a  nation  and  a  people  of 
repudiation.  [Cheers.] 


-/•:  :  v:-1 4 


